A Semi-Automatic Ontology Extension Method for Semantic Web Services

Uploaded on

this paper provides a novel semi-automatic ontology …

this paper provides a novel semi-automatic ontology
extension method for Semantic Web Services (SWS). This is
significant since ontology extension methods those existing
in literature mostly deal with semantic description of static
Web resources such as text documents. Hence, there is a need
for methods that can serve dynamic Web resources such as
SWS. The developed method in this paper avoids redundancy
and respects consistency so as to assure high quality of the
resulting shared ontologies.

More in: Technology , Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. ACEEE Int. J. on Information Technology, Vol. 02, No. 01, March 2012 A Semi-Automatic Ontology Extension Method for Semantic Web Services Mutaz M. Al-Debei1, and Mohammad Mourhaf AL Asswad2 1 The University of Jordan, Department of Management Information Systems, Amman, Jordan Email: M.AlDebei@ju.edu.jo 2 Brunel University, Department of Information Systems and Computing, London, UK Email: Mohammad.Al-Asswad@brunel.ac.ukAbstract—this paper provides a novel semi-automatic ontology methods [See 5]. Retrospectively, ontology extension hasextension method for Semantic Web Services (SWS). This is been proposed as an effective and efficient solution to manysignificant since ontology extension methods those existing applications that use ontologies dynamically [6]. So, once anin literature mostly deal with semantic description of static application is changed or new requirements are added, theWeb resources such as text documents. Hence, there is a need ontology can be updated to accommodate new semantics forfor methods that can serve dynamic Web resources such asSWS. The developed method in this paper avoids redundancy the changes. Ontology extension can be simply defined asand respects consistency so as to assure high quality of the the process of adding new ontological constructs to anresulting shared ontologies. existing ontology [7] while keeping the consistency of the ontology and avoiding any potential redundancy. TheseIndex Terms—Ontology, Ontology Extension, Semantic Web constructs can belong to any type of ontological entitiesServices, SWS, Name-based Matching, WSDL, Annotation such as classes and properties. Providing a novel and dynamic ontology extension method for SWS is the main aim I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND of this paper. The rest of this paper is structured as follows. Ontologies are fundamental components of the Sematic Next, we provide an overview about XML schema of WSDLWeb as they are used to provide precise, explicit and shared and explain the annotation process. Then, we present themeanings of Web resources. Ontology can be described as a proposed ontology extension method. Thereafter, we providedefinition of concepts, axioms and relations between concepts a concise case through which we illustrate and evaluate thein a formal, shared and machine-understandable format [1; proposed method. Before providing the paper’s conclusions,2]. Ontologies have been applied to a wide range of computer we present some important related work and we show theapplications such as knowledge engineering and sharing, contribution of this paper.database design, Artificial Intelligence and Web services.Semantic Web Services (SWS) are Web resources that provide II. WSDL STRUCTURE AND THE ANNOTATION PROCESSmore agile and efficient activities (i.e. discovery, composition It is necessary to analyze the WSDL general structureand execution monitoring) of Web services than conventional first in order to make clear how WSDL elements can besyntactic ones. For SWS activities to be automatically semantically described. In overall terms, a WSDL file isperformed by software agents and other Web services and composed of an element declaration, type definition, interface,applications, they need to be annotated to shared ontologies binding and service. The element declaration, type definitionso as to provide precise, shared and semantically rich and interface provide an abstract definition of a service, whilemeanings to SWS elements. Semantic annotation of SWS binding and service describe the implementation aspects ofinvolves referencing WSDL (Web Service Description a service [8]. Element declaration and type definitions areLanguage) elements such as components of XML Schema to defined in the schema part of a WSDL file and provide dataappropriate constructs of shared ontologies according to type definitions for input and output messages of operationsSAWSDL (Semantic Annotation for Web Service Description and their parts. In an XSD, the elements that are directLanguage) notation. However, it is unlikely for shared children of a schema element are called global elements. Otherontologies to cover different knowledge domains XSD elements are called local elements. Furthermore, sub-comprehensively. To solve this problem, ontology engineers elements of a complex type element are called direct childneed either to build a more comprehensive ontology from elements of that complex type element. To give more insights,scratch or to reuse and extend existing ones in order to provide Figure 1 presents a snapshot of a WSDL file of a Publicationmeanings for Web service elements those having no Information service. The binding and service elements ofcorrespondences on the shared ontology side. The first this service are removed due to space limitation. The dataoption (i.e. ontology building) can be done either manually type definition (XSD) part of this WSDL document definesor automatically. Manual ontology building is very difficult two global complex element; namely ‘Book’ andand labor-intensive task [3] as it requires ontology engineers ‘JournalArticle’. The ‘Book’ element has six local childto go through a long process which includes several phases elements; namely ‘ISBN’, ‘BookTitle’, ‘Author’, ‘PubDate’,[See 4]. Automatic ontology building cannot provide good ‘PublishingOrganization’, and ‘VendorPrice’. These dataquality ontologies due to the immaturity of existing learning© 2012 ACEEE 29DOI: 01.IJIT.02.01.511
  • 2. ACEEE Int. J. on Information Technology, Vol. 02, No. 01, March 2012types are used to define data of input and output message to accommodate correspondences for the rest of elementsparts of WSDL operations. The ‘JournalArticle’ element, on included within the given WSDL file.the other hand, has also six local child elements; namely TABLE I: ANNOTATED ELEMENTS BEFORE EXTENSION‘JournalName’, ‘Author’, ‘ISBN’, ‘Publisher’, ‘ArticleTitle’,and ‘Price’. In the next section, the proposed ontology extension method is explained. III. T HE PROPOSED EXTENTION METHOD Ontologies used for annotation should be extended when they do not have correspondences for service concepts. In the context of this paper, an ontology is extended by adding a class and/or object property. When extending an ontology, a class should not be added to the ontology as an isolated entity. This is because ontological classes normally participate in relations (properties) that form axioms. Object properties can be seen as links that relate two or more classes Figure 1: A Snapshot of a Publication Information Service WSDL together. Subsequently, a newly added class should be file. appropriately linked to other classes in an ontology. TheBased on the previous brief analysis of WSDL elements, one extension method proposed in this paper defines twocan conclude that XSD elements including simple types (i.e. extension types; namely complex and child elementsthose having no child elements) in addition to complex types extension. Complex elements have a main concept and a setalong with their child elements should be annotated since of. Child elements that are conceptually linked to the mainthey describe data of operations’ messages. Other WSDL concept with implicit relations that are derived from the XSDelements such as bindings and service define technical details structure of complex types. The ontology extension methodand thus do not require semantic annotation. XSD definition presented in this paper utilizes OWL API [11] to extract andembeds implicit semantic information that requires add ontological constructs to shared ontologies. The OWLdisambiguation, however. For example, the relation between API is a Java API that allows developers to manipulatea complex type and each of its child elements is similar to an ontologies represented in the Web Ontology Languageontological property. The annotation process can simply be (OWL) formalism. In addition, CN-Match algorithm is useddescribed as finding correspondences in a shared ontology in this paper to perform the required matching of ontologicalfor Web service elements. The annotation process is either constructs. CN-Match [see 12] is an automatic name-basedconducted manually [See 9]; or semi-automatically [10]. matching algorithm that enables effective and precise matching between single terms and compound nouns as it is (1) founded on linguistics theories; (2) exploit external thesauri such as WordNet; and (3) utilize Levenshtein Distance to measure similarities between strings [13]. The ontology extension method to accommodate missing correspondences to Web service child elements is demonstrated in Figure 3 and explained as follows. 1. Use CN-Match to check if the given ontology has a correspondence for the given child element (denoted in Figure 3 as CorCE). This process is important since it prevents any Figure 2: Example of the Annotation Process. potential redundancy that may result from adding extraFigure 2 represents an example of how elements of an construct that denotes the same meaning as the meaning ofInformation publication service are annotated to a shared the given child element. The required correspondence of theontology describing the publication domain. According to given child element could exist in the ontology but might notthe provided case in Figure 2, only five elements (one complex be linked through an object property to the correspondenceelement; i.e. “Book” and four child elements; i.e. “ISBN”, of the complex element (CorCoE). Consequently, it is very“BookTitle”, “PublishingOrganization”, and “VendorPrice”) important that all classes of the given ontology are matchedcan be annotated to appropriate ontological elements (see against missing child elements.Table1). Therefore, the ontology should be extended in order 2. If the ontology contains such a correspondence, create© 2012 ACEEE 30DOI: 01.IJIT.02.01. 511
  • 3. ACEEE Int. J. on Information Technology, Vol. 02, No. 01, March 2012an object property and give it an appropriate label. The found ing the extension method for complex elements, CN-Match iscorrespondence and the correspondence of the complex performed and no appropriate correspondence forelement are the domain and range of the new object property. ‘JournalArticle’ is found. Therefore, a class called3. But, if the ontology does not contain such a ‘JournalArticle’ is added to the shared ontology. Accordingcorrespondence, create a class (Cls) that denotes the given to the WSDL file, ‘JournalArticle’ has six child elements (i.e.child element. Next, create an object property and label it ‘JournalName’, ‘Author’, ‘ISBN’, ‘Publisher’, ‘ArticleTitle’,appropriately. The created class and the correspondence of and ‘Price’). Each one of them is treated using extensionthe complex element are the domain and range of the new method for child elements. By applying this extensionobject property. method, CN-Match finds five appropriate correspondences Using the case illustrated in section II, one can note that (‘ISBN’, ‘Title’, ‘Publisher’, ‘Price’, and ‘Author’) are foundone complex element (i.e. ‘JournalArticle’) and three child for five child elements (‘ISBN’, ‘ArticleTitle’, ‘Publisher’,elements (i.e. ‘Author’, ‘PubDate’, and ‘Journal Name’) cannot ‘Price’, and ‘Author’) of the ‘JournalArticle’ complex elements.be annotated to appropriate constructs in the shared Accordingly, five object properties (i.e. ‘isIdentifiedBy’,ontology. Hence, an extension to the shared ontology is ‘hasTitle’, ‘isPublishedBy’, ‘isPricedAt’, and ‘isWrittenBy’)required. As a further explanation about the application of are added to the shared ontology to link ‘JournalArticle’ classthe proposed extension method, we now show how ‘Author’ to the five found corresponding classes. The domain of theseas a child element of the ‘Book’ complex element can be added five object properties is ‘JournalArticle, while the ranges areto the existing shared ontology. In this case, CN-Match is the aforementioned five corresponding classes respectively.used to check for a correspondence of ‘Author’ at the The ‘JournalName’ child element of the ‘JournalArticle’ontology side. CN-Match is unable to find any semantically complex element is treated differently as CN-Match is unableappropriate correspondence. Therefore, a class called to find any appropriate correspondence for it. Therefore, a‘Author’ and an object property called ‘isWrittenBy’ are class called ‘JournalName’ and an object property calledadded to the shared ontology. The domain of this object ‘isPublishedIn’ are added to the shared ontology. The domainproperty is ‘Book’ and the range is ‘Author’. In a similar of this object property is ‘JournalArticle’, while the range ismanner, the other child element of ‘Book’ (i.e. ‘PubDate’) is ‘JournalName’.added to the shared ontology. Figure 4: Extension for Complex Elements. Figure 3: Extension for Child Elements. Having extended the shared ontology (see Figure 5) toOn the other hand, extension for complex elements is accommodate correspondences for all elements included inperformed as presented in Figure 4 and explained below. the WSDL file of the publication information service, a1.Use CN-Match to check if the shared ontology has a complete annotation of this WSDL file is achieved ascorrespondence for the given complex element (denoted in presented in Table 2.Figure 4 as CorCoE). Redundancy is also checked as in theextension for child elements.2.If the ontology does not include such a correspondence,then add a class with appropriate label; otherwise go to step3.For every element included within the set of child elementsof the given complex element, perform the extension methodfor child elements as illustrated in Figure 3. To further explain the previous method, we also use thecase presented in Section II so as to add the required corre-spondences. The WSDL file presented in Figure 1 showsthat ‘JournalArticle’ is a complex element that seems to nothaving any correspondence in the shared ontology. Follow Figure 5: The Complete ontology after Extension.© 2012 ACEEE 31DOI: 01.IJIT.02.01. 511
  • 4. ACEEE Int. J. on Information Technology, Vol. 02, No. 01, March 2012 TABLE II: ANNOTATED ELEMENTS AFTER EXTENSION. can be used for extension. The proposed extension approach is different from the other approaches those existing in the literature in that: (1) It adds not only classes but also object properties to extended ontologies; and (2) it performs an important check using CN-Match to find out if a similar concept to the candidate one exists in the ontology. If such a concept exists, then it will be used instead of adding a new class. This later check process prevents any potential redundancies in extended ontologies. The ontology extension method IV. RELATED WORK AND CONTRIBUTIONS OF THIS PAPER developed in this research can extend ontologies by adding There are few approaches that aim to extend ontologies classes and object properties only. Other important ontologicalin an automatic or semi-automatic manner. For example, [14] components such as datatype properties and sub-super classprovide an ontology extension method to add concepts and relationships can also be added during extension. Addingrelations extracted from textual documents using NLP these extra structures could, however, complicate and delaytechniques. A different ontology extension approach is the annotation and extension activities and thus the feasibilityproposed by [6]. This approach expands ontologies semi- of this addition should be studied carefully in real, practicalautomatically by mining textual data of Websites. In the later and industrial settings.approach, Spreading Activation, which is a semantic networksearch method, is used to find the most relevant terms to the REFERENCESgiven domain. These terms are then incorporated into the [1] T. R. Gruber, “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontologyoriginal ontology [6]. However, the aforementioned Specification,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 5, pp. 199-220, 1993.approaches are for static resources (i.e. text documents) and [2] R. Jasper and M. Uschold, “A framework for understandingthus cannot be used for applications that require dynamic and classifying ontology applications,” in Workshop on Ontologiesontology extension. Moreover, redundancy check is not and Problem-Solving Methods, Stockholm, 1999.provided within these approaches and thus the quality of [3] X. Jiang and A. Tan, “CRCTOL: A Semantic-based Domainextended ontologies cannot be assured. On the other hand, Ontology Learning System,” Jounrnal of the American Society forthe proposed extension method deals with dynamic resources Information Science and Technology, vol. 61, pp. 150-168, 2010. [4] M. M. Al-Debei and G. Fitzgerald, “OntoEng: A design method(i.e. SWS). To the best of authors’ knowledge, this proposed for ontology engineering in information systems,” in ACMmethod is the first to be implemented in order to deal with the OOPSLA, Florida, Orlando, USA, 2009, pp. 1-25.important SWS in nowadays digital business. Moreover, the [5] L. Zhou, “Ontology learning: state of the art and openproposed method importantly avoids redundancy and issues,” Information Technology and Management, vol. 8, pp. 241-ensures consistency while extending shared ontologies. This 252, 2007.is because this method does not any new ontological [6] J. Liu, S. Zhangb and J. Hub, “A case study of an inter-enterpriseconstruct without performing redundancy check by utilizing workflow-supported supply chain managementCN-Match algorithm. Consistency of shared ontologies is system,” Information & Management, vol. 42, pp. 441-454, 2005.assured by only adding constructs those can be linked to [7] D. Beneventano, S. Bergamaschi, F. Guerra and M. Vincini,other constructs within the ontology for the sake of ontology “Synthesizing an Intgrated Ontology,” IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 7, pp. 42-51, 2003.commitment. In other words, concepts that do not fall within [8] K. Jacek, V. Tomas, B. Carine and F. Joel, “SAWSDL: Semanticthe scope of the shared ontology (i.e. isolated concepts) Annotations for WSDL and XML Schema,” IEEE Internetcannot be added. These two features (i.e. avoiding Computing, vol. 11, pp. 60-67, 2007.redundancy and respecting consistency) would result in high [9] D. Bell, S. de Cesare, N. Iacovelli, M. Lycett and A. Merico, “Aquality shared ontologies. framework for deriving semantic web services,” Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 9, pp. 69-84, 2007. V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK [10] Z. Duo, L. Juan-Zi and X. Bin, “Web service annotation using ontology mapping,” in Preceeding of the 2005 IEEE International The provision of a method for semi-automatic ontology Workshop on Service-Oriented System Engineeringextension is a contribution to the existing body of knowledge. (SOSE’05), 2005, pp. 235-242.The provided method can be used not only for Web service [11] J. Euzenat, “An API for ontology alignment,” in Proceedingsannotation but also for other applications such as annotation Third International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan,of HTML pages, semantic query answering and knowledge- 2004, pp. 698-712.based systems. The ontology extension idea is very new and [12] M. M. AL Asswad, “Semantic Information Systems Engineering: A Query-based Approach for Semi-automaticthus few extension approaches exist in the ontology literature. Annotation of Web Services,” 2011.Most existing approaches extend ontologies used for semantic [13] V. I. Levenshtein, “Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Spuriousdescription of textual and static Web resources. and Deletions of Ones,” Problems of Information Transmission, vol.Consequently, there is a need for ontology extension methods 1, pp. 8-17, 1965.that can serve dynamic Web resources. This is because [14] J. Jung, K. Oh and G. Jo, “Extracting relations towards ontology extension,” in In Proce edings of th e Third KES In ternation aldynamic resources are different from static ones in terms of Symposium on Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies andthe nature of provided data and the way in which this data Applications, 2009, pp. 242.© 2012 ACEEE 32DOI: 01.IJIT.02.01.511